Mishnah, the first Mishnah in Gittin is the din that if you bring a get from מדינת הים, if somebody brings a get from chutz la'aretz, from outside of Eretz Yisrael to Eretz Yisrael, the Mishnah says you have to say בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם. The shaliach who brings the get must say that, \"In front of me it was written, in front of me it was signed.\" Gemara goes into a whole אריכות, what is the reason for it? We have a machloket, Rabbah and Rava, whether it's because we're afraid that it wasn't written and signed lishmah, and then it would be pasul, so they have to testify lishmah. The other reason is because we're afraid eventually you might need kiyum. You might need verification for the signatures, and it'll be very hard to get, because you're coming from a different country, different country. Like this, if you need verification of a signature, you'll find people who recognize the signature and they'll be able to testify. But since it's from מדינת הים, from chutz la'aretz to Eretz Yisrael, it's far. There's no such no real communication, people won't know. That's why the shaliach, when he brings it, has to verify the signature automatically at that... whatever the reason. In

Eretz Yisrael, they all write lishmah? They assume that... Well, סתמא לשמה, yeah. And then the Gemara goes into all the... What about other שטרות? Kiyum... Yeah, yeah. So when you bring the get, the shaliach has to be mekayem it. That's how we פסקן, that the reason for בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם is because mekayem. Normally, you have to have two people for kiyum. If a regular שטר, if you have a regular document and there is a question on the signatures if they're authentic, would it be different now when we have communications? Well, the Gemara, in the Gemara's time also changed already from different places, because there was communication. So you have to have two people normally to verify. In this case, because of the get and because of the possibility of if you make it harder, then the woman will not get the verification of the שטר, and if she will not get the verification of the שטר, she'll remain an agunah, she won't be able to get the divorce, and the husband is someplace far, she has no husband and she's not able to remarry. And therefore, the chachamim said that one is enough. So if one person testify, the shaliach, the chachamim believed the shaliach. Then there's a din that the Gemara says here on דף ה', it's actually taken from a Mishnah later on, האישה עצמה מביאה גיטה. The

woman herself, if she brings a get, she comes to Eretz Yisrael, and she comes with a get. So if she could do it, ובלבד שצריכה לומר בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם. She herself also has to testify like a regular shaliach, just like... Her own get? Her own get. Who she says... We'll see in a second. ...who wrote it? Seems like a conflict of interest. Huh? Seems like a conflict of interest that she should be able to... Okay, but the chachamim believed here a woman, believed a בעל דבר, somebody who is נוגע בדבר, who is has an interest in it, and the chachamim said we believe her, but she has to say בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם. And Rashi explains, the פרק ב' דתנינן, second perek, when the Gemara brings this, the Gemara asks: מי מטא גיטא לידה איגרשה. She's already... She's divorced already! מילא when the shaliach brings it, he's going to divorce her, so we're going to verify what happens. But if she herself brings it, she got the get already! The moment she got the get, she is divorced! ומשנינן, the Gemara answers, that this is a case דאייתיתיה עד בית דין פלוני בתורת שליחות, that the husband gave it to her in מדינת הים, and he said to her, \"I don't want you to get divorced yet. I want you to take it to Eretz Yisrael, come to this and this Beit Din, and there you will get divorced.\" So she, till that point, she's a shaliach. That's all she is. And when she brings it בתורת שליח, just like a regular shaliach has to say בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם, that's the only way the chachamim said that allowed to have the shaliach give the get, so the Mishnah says she herself, even though it's her own get, and she if she brings it בתורת שליח, as a shlichut, then she has to say בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם. What happens if she doesn't bring it בתורת שליח? If a woman comes with a get, not, what is the din there? Not divorced. No, no... Divorced. No, that's in this case. She's not divorced until now. But what happens if a woman comes not as a shaliach, she comes to Eretz Yisrael... With a get. ...and she has a get? What's the problem? Okay. She's a divorced woman. Do we accept the get without kiyum, or does she have to be mekayem it first? Comes with a get... If she had kiyum where she where she got it? She you could see on the get if she had kiyum. Kiyum is a verification that the beit din would write a we call it an הנפק, he would write, it's like a notary public, but a different style, not a notary public lechatchilah when they see you sign, but afterwards, you bring the get, so we're always afraid, any shtar, we're afraid, maybe the shtar is מזוייף, maybe the shtar is forged. How do you know it's not forged? She comes with a get, maybe she wrote the get! She forged this thing, how do you know this guy wrote it? So you have to be mekayem it. So the she'eilah is, if there is no ערעור, nobody is challenging it, Does she have to mekayem it? So

here we have a machloket between the Rambam and the Raavad. The Rambam in Hilchot Ishut, פרק ז'. No, in Hilchot Gerushin, פרק ז', הלכה כ\"ד, I think. Yeah, here. Let's start הלכה כ\"ג. פרק ז' הלכה כ\"ג and הלכה כ\"ד. האיש שנתן גט לאשתו, man gives a גט to his wife, ונכתב ונחתם בפניה was signed and sealed and written and signed in front of her, ואמר לה and he says to her הרי את שלוחתי, you are my שליח להוליכו to take it עד בית דין פלוני till a certain בית דין. והם יעמידו שליח, they will appoint a שליח, ויתנו לך גט זה and then you'll get, they'll give you this גט, ותתגרשי בו, you'll get divorced. Someone has to give it to her. Who has to give it to her? A שליח. But he made, because the דין is husband can take a שליח to send a גט and he can say, when you come to this place, you appoint another שליח, let that other שליח give the wife. Same thing with her, he tells her: I'm giving you the גט, be a שליח to that בית דין. When you come to the בית דין, בית דין will appoint another שליח that you will give it to, and that שליח will give it to you. הרי זו נאמנת לומר בפניהם, she is believed to say in front of this בית דין בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם, like a regular שליח, that I saw it written, I saw it signed. And whatever the reason we need בפני נכתב for a regular שליח will apply to her too, but we trust her. והם נוטלין הימנה ונותנין אותו לשליח ליתנו לה, the בית דין takes it, gives it to the שליח to give her, כמאמר הבעל, as the husband says. הלכה כ\"ד: במה דברים אמורים, this is only כשהתנה עליה הבעל תנאי זה, if the husband gave it to her with this condition. אבל אם לא התנה עליה, if he didn't make a condition, אלא נתן לה גיטה, and he gave her a גט, והרי הגט יוצא מתחת ידה, and now she comes, she has a גט, אינה צריכה לומר כלום. If a woman comes to ארץ ישראל, those days we're talking about בבל from חוץ לארץ to ארץ ישראל, and brings a גט, and says I'm divorced, now I have a גט, she doesn't have to say anything. והרי היא בחזקת מגורשת. The חזקה is she's divorced. הואיל והגט שבידה כתוב כהלכתו ועדים חתומים עליו, looks like a כשר גט, signed, עדים fine. ואף על פי שאין אותו בית דין מכירין כתב ידי העדים, even though בית דין doesn't recognize the signatures, ולא נתקיים, there was no קיום there. אין חוששין לו שמא זיופה אותו, so we're not afraid that maybe he forged it, she forged it. And then he says, לפיכך נעמיד הגט בחזקתו ותנשא, the get is the chazakah and she could get married with this get. Every get has to have kiyum? Huh? Every get has to have kiyum? If, so the Rambam learns, only if there's a challenge. As long as, that's what he's saying, as long as there's no challenge, she comes with a get, there is no kiyum on it, it's okay. Beit din, there's no הנפק, which is kiyum. Beit din will get her married. She says she wants to marry somebody, because based on this get, she will get married. Migo? Huh? Migo? Could have said she never married. No, good, and אה ודאי if we know she was married. What a migo? Woman we know she was married, she comes, brings a get, we believe her with the get. Unless, he says, עד שיערער הבעל, unless the baal challenges. If the husband comes later and says, hey, she, who are you married, I never divorced her. But she has a get! Now you have to mekayem it. If you're not mekayem the get, then she has a problem, then we assume she's not divorced and child, children from the second marriage is mamzerim, all the cases here. And he says if we were afraid of this, a whole אריכות in Rambam, but then the Rambam finishes off שאין דיני האיסורין כדיני הממונות. The reason is because this is, the reason why we believe her is because this is issur not mamon. By regular shtar not. By regular shtar, if someone comes with a shtar, we will say to him, someone comes with a shtar to beit din and says: Reuven owes me money, beit din will right away say: you have to mekayem it, bring two edim to show this get, here you don't need. Why? Because this is issur. פשוט פשט in Rambam the way we learn, because עד אחד נאמן באיסורין. Since we're talking about the get and this is a question of marriage and not marriage, it's not mamon, it's issur. There's two things, there are monetary cases, has its rules, issur cases, issur ve-heter cases, has its rules. The rule by issur ve-heter is עד אחד נאמן באיסורין, one person is ne'eman, even a lady is ne'emanet. Actually Tosafot says in the beginning of Gittin, where do we know it from? We learn it out from וספרה לה. Says a woman herself counts the seven days after she is a niddah and she goes to the mikveh, and you don't have עדים, maybe she's not maybe she's lying, maybe she didn't, the Torah trusted her. So עד אחד נאמן באיסורין. שוחט שחט בהמה all by himself, and comes, gives you, says it's kasher meat. How do you know it's kasher meat? עד אחד נאמן באיסורין. Unless someone comes and challenge, then it will be a she'elah. So here also, that's what it seems from the Rambam that he says שאין דיני איסורין כדיני ממונות, since this is a din of issur and not memonot. This is the Rambam's shittah. The Rambam says it not only here, but in פרק י״ב in הלכות גירושין הלכה ב׳ he says basically the same thing very short. And there, the Ra'avad argues. The Rambam says like this: הוציאה גט מתחת ידה / ידו If a woman comes and brings a get, shows a get, ואמרה she says, \"גירשני בעלי בזה, my husband divorced me with this,\" הרי זו נאמנת, she's believed, ותנשא בו אף על פי שאין עמו קיום. She can get married even though there was no verification, no קיום, כמו שבארנו, like I explained earlier. Here, the Ra'avad says: כתב הראב״ד ז״ל: אומר אני שיקיימו בחותמיו. \"I say, no. She can't get married unless you mekayem it first. אף על פי שלא יצא עליו ערעור, even if there's no challenge.\" The Ra'avad holds she comes with a get, we will not, beis din will not allow her to get married unless the get is מקוים. How does all this apply between two countries, not Israel, but between Same thing. Same thing. Why didn't he argue before, when he said it the first time? That's that's the she'eilah, the matter, why did he wait until till the second time? But the fact is, so that's a she'eilah which is separate she'eilah. So, if it applies the same thing, why do they keep mentioning chutz la'aretz? Why don't they say just between two countries? Oh, that's where it goes in Rabbah and Rava.

According to Rabbah, the reason is because of lishmah, then it only applies to Eretz Yisrael and chutz la'aretz. But according to Rava, it's all countries, and general situation then, where were the יידישע ישוב? The יידישע ישוב was in Eretz Yisrael and in Bavel and in chutz la'aretz. Umemeila, we say from here to there. I mean, the Gemara talks about all this, and make a gezeirah backwards and forwards. This is this is a whole sugya there. What's the advantage of going as far as for the beis din to send to his wife, say, like you said What would be? Why would he not give her to her right in the spot? Yeah. I have many reasons why he would do it, because as long as she's not divorced, he eats the פירות of all her belongings. The moment she's divorced, everything is hers. So, he wants to keep it longer, that's Yeah, she's not divorced, it'll take her two months to get there. What if she run away to different countries? Huh? If he wants to send her away to a different country? Send her back. So? So this way, he knows she's there, that's all. Oh, otherwise she might not go. Okay! Whatever, yeah. Whatever the reason is, he wants to send her far away. Not not for al pi din, there's a reason No, I'm saying the reason of פירות is a no, not din, but it's an הלכה'דיקע reason. Al pi halacha, the moment she's divorced, he can't have her פירות anymore. But if she's not divorced, he wants to have it. So, the she'eilah is according to the Rambam, the Rambam said, as we said, the reason why it works, that you don't need kiyum and we trust her, because it's issur, and עד אחד נאמן באיסורין. It's issur. It's not mamon. The question is, this is not a regular issur, it's a דבר שבערווה. אין דבר שבערווה פחות משנים. There is a rule that when it comes to inyanim of marriage and divorce, or the general term אישות, then you must have two. That's what the Gemara says in Gittin דף ב׳, that even though normally עד אחד נאמן באיסורין, nevertheless, when it comes to the case of of אישות, of דבר שבערווה we call it, אין דבר שבערווה פחות משנים. When you give a when you give a kiddushin, you must have two edim standing by the chuppah and watching, standing there giving the kiddushin. There's a din. One is not, and it's not only because we have to verify through two edim. דבר שבערווה בעצם needs two edim. To give a get, you have to have two edim. When it comes to these things that it has to do with דבר שבערווה, it's not a regular issur. Now, why would this be considered, according to the Rambam, an issur, but not a דבר שבערווה? Obviously, it's not a real דבר שבערווה. Isn't a woman נאמנת to claim מת בעלי? מת בעלי? Yeah, the חומרא ומקיל, because אשה דייקא ומינסבא. Right, so wouldn't it wouldn't wouldn't you have the same No, here we don't We don't say here אשה דייקא ומינסבא by a get, because over there, she's afraid the husband will come. She said he died. But she's afraid he'll come and מערער. So, so big deal, she'll say she'll argue with him. She can't argue if she said he died, she can't argue with him and say he's a he's he died if he come. Even in the Rambam, if he comes and does ערעור, she needs to mekayem the get. Right. So if she can't, then she's going to be in the same situation than if she said מת בעלי and she's No, she she's going to look to mekayem. But anyways, it's not the whole over there is that she knows that's going to happen that the husband might come, that's always it says the lashon, the husband might come, but we don't say it by a get. So, the bottom line is, why is it called Not why is this not a דבר שבערוה according to the Rambam? Obviously according to the Ravad that it is a דבר שבערוה. Why is it? The terutz is there's another machloket between the Rambam and the Ravad, and that's in הלכות אישות. When you appoint a shaliach, do you need two witnesses there when you do the מינוי השליחות, when you do the appointment, when you appoint the shaliach to send the get? To send kiddushin? You could be mekadesh through a shaliach. Do you need eidim בשעת your you send? So the Rambam says when the husband appoints a שליח להולכה, if he appoints a shaliach to take the kiddushin, you don't need eidim. He could just come over to a person without eidim, appoint him as a shaliach, and he becomes a shaliach. If the woman makes a שליח לקבלה, because he could make a shaliach to bring the get, called a שליח להולכה, and the woman is not divorced till she gets the get, she could make a shaliach to receive the get. And then the guy who comes in her place, as soon as the husband gives the shaliach the get, she is divorced because the shaliach takes her place. So the Rambam says that when he makes a shaliach you don't need eidim. When she makes a shaliach you do need eidim. And the Raavad argues and asks this, \"I don't understand, what's the difference?\" And it makes a lot of sense that it shouldn't make be a difference, mima nafshach. If you consider making the shaliach into a דבר שבערוה, since this is a shaliach for a get, a shaliach for kiddushin, it is part of the process of the marriage, let's say, so it falls into the category that it's a דבר שבערוה, אין דבר שבערוה פחות משנים, you must have at least two. So therefore, when you make a shaliach, which is the beginning of a דבר שבערוה, you have to have two. Makes sense. And it would be by both. Whether it be side דבר שבערוה, side him making a get a shaliach is a דבר שבערוה and you need two, side her Basically shelichut is part of the Yeah, yeah, it's But if you say it's not a דבר שבערוה, because it's only called הכשר מצוה, it's only a preparation to the דבר שבערוה, but it's not, so you don't need two people when you make the So you don't need it in both cases. What is the difference between the two cases? Why? What is the sevara of the Rambam? Umimeila what is the machloket between the Rambam, whatever we're going to explain in the Rambam, we have to find a reason why the Raavad does not doesn't agree. So there must be something there that it's based on why the Rambam holds making a שליח להולכה for the husband's שליח doesn't need two and שליח לקבלה does need two. And the husband's שליח takes the Kiddushin, he has to have the two witnesses there? Yeah, just he gives it to her. Yeah, because that's the Kiddushin itself. And he could be one of the witnesses. Okay, שליח נעשה עד. That's true. And the woman's שליח could be the other one. Yeah, because the din is שליח נעשה עד, because it's he becomes ed. But lefoal, when he's memaneh him, when he appoints him, he doesn't need. But when she appoints, she does need. What's the difference? Now the sevara would be like this. Okay? This this is a sheilah that all the mefarshim talk, all the mefarshim on the Rambam try to discuss what's the sevara of the Rambam. But you could say a sevara like this: when it comes to marriage, and we'll see the same thing applies to divorce, there are two inyanim when you marry, when we give Kiddushin. There is kinyan and ishut and issur. The Rogatchover actually talks about it a lot. There's two inyanim: there is kinyan, when you give Kiddushin to a wife, to a woman, she becomes yours. She's kenuyah to you. The Gemara says that she's called קנין כספו. The Gemara in Kiddushin says that a woman who gets Kiddushin is allowed to eat terumah if her husband is a kohen. Why? Because the pasuk says כי יקנה איש קנין כספו, if someone will buy a slave which is his property could eat terumah if a kohen buys it. So getting a wife is קנין כספו, it's a קנין. Getting a wife also has דינים of איסור, אישות. She's אסורה לכולי עלמא, she's אסור to the whole world. Actually the first פרק of Kiddushin starts off with the words האשה נקנית. She uses the word קנין, a woman could be נקנית. The second פרק starts off with the words האיש מקדש. What's the חילוק between נקנית and מקדש? So the Gemara says, why is it called Kiddushin? You give Kiddushin. The word Kiddushin means holiness. What has it got to do with marriage? דאסר לה אכולי עלמא כהקדש. That the word Kiddushin means that you make her forbidden to everybody, and that's not a קנין type of thing, that's an איסור type of thing. You make her forbidden to the whole world like הקדש. When somebody is מקדיש something, donate something to the בית המקדש, that's called he makes it holy, it's forbidden, no one can have הנאה from it. So when you're מקדש a woman, דאסר לה אכולי עלמא כהקדש. So we see there are two expressions. There's

נקנית and there is Kiddushin. These are two things. Actually, Tosafot in Kiddushin דף ב עמוד ב says, according to the Gemara where it says that the word Kiddushin means she is אסור to the whole world like הקדש, what's the פשט הרי את מקודשת לי? You are אסור to me? The word מקודשת means אסור. It can't! He's saying, \"You're מותר to me! You're אסור to everybody else.\" So you should have said, \"הרי את מקודשת לעולם\". What, \"מקודשת לי\"? So Tosafot says you have to taytsh, \"הרי את מקודשת לעולם בשבילי\". It means you are מקודש, means you are אסור to everybody, לי - because of me. Then Tosafot says פשטא דמילתא, if you look פשוטע טייטש, הרי את מקודשת means לי - הרי את מזומנת לי. You are mine, you're set aside for me. It seems like the two ענינים of Tosafot is the two ענינים. Set aside for me, doesn't nothing to do with איסורים, it's פשוט you are mine, you you belong to me. The other one is הרי את מקודשת means you are אסור. So there are two ענינים. There are cases where you could have one without the other. The

Rogatchover gives examples of cases, למשל a יבמה before she gets married to the יבם. A יבמה when her husband died, had no children, and the brother, her brother-in-law marries her, is she an אשת איש or not? She is an אשת איש, but not really. So he says that's קנין without אישות. A תשובה, Rogatchover holds that if you have a civil marriage, you need a גט. Why? Because it's not אישות, because there's no איסור there. It's not על פי תורה, but it's קנין. And there is such a thing as קנין without אישות. But בעצם, there are two ענינים. That's what we have here. Now, Rabbi Yosef Engel in Beit HaOtzar talks about this, different, different ראיות from all different places in ש״ס, which one. Now, he claims that when a person gives a woman קידושין, both things happen at the same time. This act of קידושין makes the קנין, and then makes the אישות, the איסור part of it. But there are others who think no, and it's a possibility of one or the other. You could say when you give קידושין, what happens is you do the קנין. If you're קונה a woman, that שלעפּס, makes her asur to the whole world, brings upon her certain dinim of אישות, certain isurim. But the kiddushin itself is a kinyan. Like when you buy a property, it's yours and doesn't belong to anyone else. Right, but that's all kinyan. And here, it's kinyan that brings about isur. Meaning, after, is that the other kinyanim done? Not, no, no, there's one kinyan. Giving the kiddushin is the kinyan. The same kiddushin, but what happens is the kiddushin is the kinyan, and automatically, that same second, it brings about the isur. Or you could say the opposite. Like a ketubah. Yeah, so you see, but, yeah. Or you could say the opposite, that when you give kiddushin, what happens? You're doing a din of אישות. You are now making her asur to the world and she becomes your wife. When she's asur to the world, there's a kinyan that comes as a result of it. She's becomes koneh to you. You could use either, there's a third way that he says that both come at the same time, not one causes the other, but there's another way to say one causes the other. Which which is similar by an eved. When you buy an eved kena'ani, a lot of dinim by an eved kena'ani have the same din like a woman. That's why when you when you free an eved kena'ani, you have to give him a get, like a get shichrur. And the same she'eilah there. What what status, when you buy an eved, there are two things happen. When you buy an eved, first of all, he belongs to you, there it's mamash he belongs to you. Also, there are certain dinim that happen here. An eved becomes chayav bemitzvot like a woman. Same thing when you divorce, when you divorce the eved, two things happen. Now you're giving him the So, he's chayav bemitzvot after he's, I mean after the get, I mean that's when he's No, no, when he be, after the the shtar shichrur he's chayav bemitzvot mamash like a Yid. And when he's Not a Yid, we're talking about an עבד An עבד כנעני. Yeah, so he's פטור from, he's חייב במצוות כאישה, which as a גוי he wasn't. The moment you make him into an עבד, you make him yours and you make certain איסורים. And it's just like we say by קידושין, the same thing by גיטין. Seen in קידוש בשבת, for example. Yeah. Says your עבד, your בהמה, you shouldn't, you should Yeah, yeah, there are certain דינים that apply to an עבד. The same thing with the גירושין. When you divorce, it's the same shailah. Is the pshat you're giving up the kinyan, and automatically the issur goes off? Or you give up the issur, and the kinyan goes off automatically? By an עבד also, when you give a שטר שחרור to an עבד, does that mean that you're giving away the kinyan, now it's not yours anymore, you give it to him, and m'meila there's a din that חל that he's חייב במצוות and all the, or the opposite? When you give him a שטר שחרור, the first thing that happens is certain הלכות, איסורדיגע זאכן, and that brings about the קנין זאך. And the same thing is by by a woman. And the shailah is סיי by by קידושין, and the shailah is סיי by גירושין. Where does it start? Does it start with the kinyan, and the issur is a result of the kinyan, or does it start with the issur, and the kinyan is a result of the issur? When you're talking about גירושין, we don't have to say הרי את מותרת. Huh? We say, \"הרי את מותרת לכל אדם\". Yeah. That has nothing to do with kinyan. No, but מותרת could And by קידושין also you say הרי את מקודשת. Good, there's another pshat, but according to the פשט מקודשת, לכולי עלמא, הרי את מקודשת. Yeah, but that's. Yeah, but you see other things too. That you're all for yourself, הרי את וקונה את עצמה. Yeah, it's a לשון. Yeah, even מותרת means it's טאקע מותר, but that's not lav davka that this is the first thing that happens. This is what's going to be the result. Now, could be that this is a machloket between the Rambam and the Raavad. If you say that it starts with קנין, and the קנין brings about the איסור, the איסור part of it is a דבר שבערוה. When we say marriage is a דבר שבערוה, which part of the marriage is a דבר שבערוה? Not the קנין part, קנין part is a גשמיותדיקע thing, that she belongs to you. It's the אישות part. If you say it starts with, starts with קנין, so when he gives the קידושין, he's doing a קנין. After the קנין, it doesn't take time, right away, but after the קנין, the איסור comes. When does that איסור part take place? When she takes it. The moment she takes it, and as she takes it in her hand, and now she's קונה to him, that second that קנין causes the איסור. And that's the difference between sending a שליח להולכה or שליח לקבלה. If he sends a שליח, his part that he does is only קנין. So, a קנין is not a דבר שבערוה. If his part is קנין, it's not a דבר שבערוה, so why, when he makes a שליח, does he have to have two עדים? Because דבר שבערוה, it's not a דבר שבערוה. When you don't send a שליח, when he himself gives, you have to have two עדים standing there. Why do you have two עדים? Because when he gives her, she's taking. So the reason really you have to have two עדים by the Kiddushin is not because of his giving, it's because of her taking, but it goes together. When does she take? When he gives. When is there a difference? If he makes a shaliach, so he is only giving a shaliach for his part. His part is not a דבר שבערוה, if you hold it starts with kinyan. And therefore, when he makes a shaliach, he doesn't have to have two עדים, it's not דבר שבערוה פחות משנים. When she makes a shaliach, she's making a shaliach to receive. The receiving part is takeh a דבר שבערוה. ממילא, she has to have. In other words, making a shaliach, according to the Rambam, is not just a preparation, it's part of it. But part of what? When he makes a shaliach, it's part of his part, and his part is not a דבר שבערוה. Even when he gives it himself, it's not his part that is דבר שבערוה, so he doesn't have to have two עדים when he makes a shaliach. When she makes a shaliach, then it's her part, her part is a דבר שבערוה, that's why you have to have two. Mah she'ein ken the Raavad will learn that it starts with issur, and since it starts with issur, his giving already is part of the אישות, his giving already is part of the דבר שבערוה. So he says that when you give, when he makes a shaliach, also has to. אלא מאי? Maybe the whole שליחות is not itself דבר שבערוה, then both don't need. But there is no way to decide to divide, to separate between the two. And that could be the מחלוקת between the Rambam and the Raavad. That's בנוגע קידושין, and the same thing is בנוגע גירושין, because the מחלוקת is by גירושין, too. Is גירושין a גדר of kinyan or is it a גדר of issur? The act, the giving the, the גירושין. The נפקא מינה also will be: What is the גט? Is the גט a שטר קנין or is the גט a שטר איסור? If the גט is to make the אישות, and that the קנין that dissolves is as a result, so the שטר is a שטר איסור. If the שטר is for the קנין, if the גט is for the קנין, then the שטר is, the גט is called a שטר קנין. The same thing with the שטר of קידושין. You could be מקדש אשה, האשה נקנית בכסף, בשטר ובביאה. You could give a שטר. The שטר, if a person gives a, is that called a שטר קנין or is it a שטר, or is it a שטר איסור? The same שאלה בנוגע כסף also. By גט, where's the קנין? But for the next marriage? No, no. קנין is giving her back. You were קונה her, now you're מקנה her to herself. The Mishnah uses the לשון 'וקונה את עצמה', she's קונה herself. The same thing באמת is in כסף. When you give כסף. And it could be that this is the פשט in חקירה that the Rebbe brings here in Parashat Ki Tetze, he brings a חקירה from the Rogatchover also. That the Rogatchover clarifies a חקירה like this: When you give כסף, it's interesting, when a person, here, gives כסף as a kinyan, what is the pshat? Is the pshat you're giving her money as a present, when you give a lady money as a present and she's קונה the money, if your intention was in order to marry her, then the result will be that she'll get married? He says, הא עילה הוא הקנין. First she's קונה the money, ועל ידי זה מתקדשת. או עילה היפך: העילה הוא הקידושין, ועל ידי זה היא קונה את מה? הדבר. First you give her kiddushin, not a present. When you're מקדש an אשה and you give her money to be מקדש, this brings about that she's קונה the money. Lichora it's talui in this. It could not mamash 100%, but it's connected. If you say kiddushin is kinyan, then it makes sense to say that you're giving her a kinyan, you're giving her money. If kiddushin is kiddushin is issur, then what you're giving her is issur, איי she's קונה the money, that's קונה later. I think it's possible this is a race that the yesod of a machloket, which doesn't bring it, and I don't know why, it says in the Gemara, if you מקדש אחותו, if someone gives kiddushin to his sister, what's the din? She has to give back the money or not? Machloket Rav uShmuel. Rav says, הכל יודעים אין קידושין תופסים באחותו, everyone knows you can't מקדש. אלא מאי? He wanted to give her a present, but he knew she would be ashamed to take a present, so he gave it to her. So according to him, she doesn't have to give it back, it's a present. Shmuel says no, she has to give it back. Why? הכל יודעים אין קידושין תופסים באחותו, everyone knows kiddushin not תופס in a sister. He wanted to give her a pikadon. He wanted her to hold some money for him, and he was afraid she wouldn't agree, so he gave it through this way, so really it's only a pikadon. So lichora you could say that the machloket depends really the the yesod is this: If you say that money by every money of kiddushin is a present, not kiddushin, you give it, this it brings about kiddushin. In a case of a sister where it can't bring the kiddushin, so it doesn't bring the kiddushin. So then it's only a only a kinyan, it's her money. The other way, if it's issur, she never got the money, so she doesn't. And that's good, you can say that's the machloket. But על כל פנים, we it comes out that there's a difference if the shtar of kiddushin a שטר קידושין, is it a shtar of kinyan or a shtar of issur? Same with the kesef, same thing with the get, is it a שטר קנין or שטר קידושין? Be'emet this machloket could be talui something else. There's a machloket in Gemara Kiddushin between Abaye veRava: קידושין שאינם מסורים לביאה. If you give kiddushin in such a way that it's impossible that this should bring to bi'ah, bring to to intimacy, למשל the case over there is: המקדש אחת משתי אחיות. There are two sisters, and the guy goes to the father and gives him kiddushin, because if they're ketanim the father takes the kiddushin, and he says, \"I'm mekadesh one of your two daughters.\" He didn't say which one, so we don't know which one it is. So on one way you could say is, so this kiddushin could never be bi'ah. Why can't it be bi'ah? You don't know which one. You don't know which one, nu, so choose one! Maybe the other one is the kiddushin, and this one is אחות אשתו. She's a sister of your wife! And each so you cannot be with each either one, so it's קידושין שאינם מסורים לביאה. Is the קידושין חל? Now, what does that mean? Is are they both ספק מקודש? One is chal, we just don't know which one, so they both need a get. Or it's nothing lechatchilah, since it could never come to bi'ah, it can't. What's the sevara of the machloket? Abaye says קידושין שאינם מסורים לביאה הוי קידושין, and Rava says not. על פי שכל you could say this is ביאה has to do with the אישות part. If you give kiddushin and it could never come to אישות, if you hold kiddushin is the ikar it starts off with אישות, so the kiddushin is אישות and can't be אישות, can't be kiddushin. That's Rava. Abaye says it's kiddushin. Why? Because kiddushin is kinyan. And if it's kinyan, so who cares it can't be ביאה? The kiddushin you gave, so the kinyan is there. If the kinyan is there, it's it's חל. We just don't know which one, so you'll give a get to both, but it's definitely חל. In this case, who do we pasken like? We know we always we pasken Abaye against Rava, we pasken like Rava, חוץ יע\\"ל קג\\"ם, six cases. יו\\"ד, עי\\"ן, למ\\"ד, קו\\"ף, גימ\\"ל, מ\\"ם, these are ראשי תיבות of six cases. The קו\\"ף is קידושין שאינם מסורים לביאה, it's this case. But here we pasken like Abaye. If you pasken like Abaye here, then that means that we pasken if this if this is the פשט in the machloket, we pasken that the ikar is kinyan. This is where the Rambam gets his think. I'm trying to say maybe the Rambam got this because the Rambam learned that Gemara and he learned pshat in the מחלוקת אביי ורבא like I'm saying now. M'meila the Rambam said here, in this case he פסקן like Abaye. פסק like Abaye, it's kinyan. If it's kinyan, so the husband's part is not a דבר שבערוה. So m'meila he doesn't need עדים when you make it. The woman's part is a דבר שבערוה, that's why the woman's part needs עדים, אין דבר שבערוה פחות משנים. It's too much chidush because there are so many other פרטים here, but that's to explain. But the bottom line is, just like by kiddushin we have the two she'eilot, the same thing by by gittin, which the result will be when you give a get, is the get a שטר קנין or a שטר of דבר שבערוה? According to the Raavad, since he says that we're trying to explain that kiddushin is איסור, דבר שבערוה, and gittin is דבר שבערוה, the first thing that you do is the issur, and then the kinyan is the result, so what is the get? A get is issur. What kind of issur? דבר שבערוה איסור. It's דבר שבערוה. The Rambam, who says, \"No, it's not a דבר שבערוה,\" because the Rambam holds that it's kiddushin is kinyan, gittin is kinyan, so the שטר is a שטר קנין. Automatically, that answers our shailah. The question was the Rambam says that when she brings a get she doesn't have to מקיים it. And he said, \"Why?\" Because he says not like regular ממון. He calls it issur. And the question I asked was, what do you mean he calls it issur, that's why one is enough? But isn't this a דבר שבערוה, and אין דבר שבערוה פחות משנים? So who cares that it's not a regular case? The answer is, according to the Rambam, it's not a דבר שבערוה. It's not a דבר שבערוה, it doesn't need two. The Raavad will argue, the Raavad holds that this kiddushin and gittin is an ענין of an issur, so it starts a דבר שבערוה. If it's a דבר שבערוה, you always need two. So, he says if she brings a get, you need two people to מקיים it. That's why the Raavad says over there, I'll read the לשון again, in פרק י״ב here when he the Rambam says if she brought out a get, you don't have to מקיים it, the Raavad says, אם תתקיים, אף על פי שלא יצא עליו ערער. Why? Because אין דבר שבערוה פחות משנים. This is דבר שבערוה, actually. The get itself is דבר שבערוה. See, giving the get is zicher called דבר שבערוה because there is the taking, because when it taking, the דבר שבערוה happens. But here we're not talking about giving the get. It's taking it. We're not talking, we're talking about the get itself. Not about the giving or taking. We're talking about she brings a get, and we have a question of the כשרות of the get. What is the status of this document? Is it the status of דבר שבערוה or not? This document could accomplish a דבר שבערוה. When you give the document, so according to the Rambam, what happens? This makes the kinyan, it's a kinyan that you're makneh her back to herself and mimela there will be דבר שבערוה. Mimela that will need two people to see the get. But if we're dealing with the validity of this document, the document is, is be'etzem a document of kinyan. It's a document of kinyan, the Rambam says so you don't need two. משא״כ the Raavad says it's a document of issur, so even the validity of the document is a דבר שבערוה, and אין דבר שבערוה פחות משנים. I'm saying it means it means that type of issur, not the Yeah. It's tucky to quetch a little bit in the lashon, but by the kesef, by kiddushin he could have in mind, but she doesn't have to with that in mind therefore it But she has to say that. But she should take it. He So by a get, she has to take the get, like she can't say, \"No, I don't want the Right, ba'al korchah. Okay. So, It doesn't make a difference what it is. When you say באים כאחד, but the בית יצר the בית ריגל says it's באים כאחד. But there are re'ayot that it's not. There are re'ayot that it's not באים. A lot of things like that. I'll give you an example: by niddah, there's two inyanim. She's there's issur and tumah. A niddah is tamei, pashut. Nowadays, we don't have a din of tumah, but if she touches, it becomes tamei. Then, she's אסור לבעלה. So, there you have also three ways. The moment she becomes a niddah, one pashut is בבת אחת, the seeing of the dam makes her tamei, makes her אסור לבעלה. Then, there's another pashut: no, that seeing the dam makes her tamei. A woman who's tamei this type of tumah becomes asur to the husband. Or it's farkert, the dam makes her asur, and when a woman is אסור לבעלה, she's teme'ah. So, all three ways. And there's re'ayot in the Gemara like this, re'ayot like this. It's always a Why get שפחה, you don't say The other Why get יפת תואר, then how could he קונה it? How could he take it? That's something else. Not on this, no. Yosef Engel has a he lists What? You're saying, you're the one that gave me Yosef Engel lists all these No, he brings re'ayot from different places where which way it works: is it issur or is it kinyan? Yeah, or does he And he holds that it comes together, so that's באים כאחד. Comes at the same time. Same time, that's what he says. See, but if I'd say like he says, then, I wouldn't have a build-up. I know, but the issur makes sense for the sake of what's the more important, what's the more It's more important, but that doesn't make that that's how that's this that's the system. We're talking about the system, how the system works. Okay. Okay. How does he answer the the מחלוקת Rambam? Oh, there's other ones. First of all, say different Just the right amount of time. Yeah.